1. RULE OF LAW COURT CASES

2. S v Anderson 1964 (3) SA 494 (A) • When will an appeal court alter a sentence? • No reasonable man ought to impose such a sentence • Sentence out of proportion to the gravity and magnitude of the offence • Sentence induces a sense of shock or outrage • Sentence is grossly excessive or inadequate • Improper exercise of discretion by trail judge

3. Interests of justice require it • Not when court would have exercised discretion differently • Only after careful consideration of all relevant circumstance • Nature of the offence committed • Person of the accused • Great difference between sentence of appeal court and sentence imposed – trail court acted unreasonably

4. S v Zinn 1969 (2) SA 537 (A) • Duties of the Judge • Punish in spirit of equity not anger • Faults of judges • Hastiness • Striving after severity • Misplaced pity • No steps – more harshly or indulgently than is called for by the case

5. Zinn continues • Trivial cases – more inclined to mildness • Serious cases – follow severity of laws with certain moderation of generosity • Traid • Crime • Offender • Interests of Society

6. Zinn continues • Age • Generally not ground for leniency • No corporal punishment • Chances to reform? • Health • Medical care needed – provide in gaol

7. S v Bridges 1997 (2) SACR 518 (C) • Traid • Crime • Offender • Interests of Society • When will an appeal court alter a sentence? • Great difference between sentence of appeal court and sentence imposed – • Disturbingly inappropriate • Differs markedly